City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. It is September 15th, 2026. And we are going to start this meeting of the Gallatin City Council. It is officially called to order. Each of our meetings, we begin with the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation. This evening, Councilman Alexander will lead us in the pledge and offer the invocation. And I would invite you all to stand with me, please.

Let's pray. Father, we thank you for your presence here in this place. We thank you, God, for this free country that we live in, God, and the rights and privileges that it affords us. And we recognize those are gifts from you, and we just pause tonight and say thank you. Father, we ask you to bless our time tonight. God, give us wisdom and understanding. Father, may everything we say and do be pleasing in your sight. O Lord, my strength and my redeemer, we ask in Jesus' name. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay, Ms. Kittrell, if you would call the roll for us, please.

Vice Mayor Hayes. Present. Councilman Alexander.

Present.

Councilman Carter.

Present.

Councilman Phan. Here. Councilman Fennell is absent. Councilman Jones.

Here.

And Councilman Juwantz. Here. Mayor, we have a quorum.

Thank you so much. This evening, you have the minutes from the September 1st, 2026 council meeting for consideration to be approved. I have a motion by Councilman Jones.

Second.

Second by Vice Mayor Hayes. Are there any additions, deletions, corrections requested? Seeing none, all in favor of approving those minutes from September 1st, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no.

Abstent.

Okay. I have five yes, one abstention. I was absent. Okay. And so the minutes are unanimously approved. We are going to now move to public recognition on agenda-related items. This is the time of the meeting that anyone may speak to address an item that's on the evening's agenda. There's also a period of time at the end of the meeting where you can speak to address items that are not on the agenda. And I also want you to know that there are two public hearings tonight, and so if that is an issue of concern to you, you may prefer to speak during one of the public hearings versus under the public recognition on agenda-related items. The first public hearing is on the Ordinance 02608-60, and that is for... zoning 255 acres to the IR Restrictive District, east of Highway 31, south of Bright's Lane. And then the other is on Resolution R2609-76, which would establish the crossings of Hidden Creek Infrastructure Development District. So with that, I'm going to declare that public recognition on agenda-related items is open. You come to the center podium, give us your name and your address for the record, and you'll have five minutes to speak.

Thank you, Mayor. My name is Roger Matchett. I'm a retired architect that lives at 936 Franklin Road in Gallatin, Tennessee. I talked to Michael Bates with the Gallatin Housing Authority. I'm working as a consultant for them on a potential project they're working with that has to do with Bly Street and Small Street, kind of redevelopment of that area with expansion of Bledsoe, not Bledsoe, Bly. I'm getting older. That's why I'm retired. But we've gotten initial traction with HUD, with THDA to move forward with the project. We've got a ways to go to get everything developed as far as planning. We've just kind of recently gotten that underway. Your ordinance number nine seems to be a fairly big hurdle for us. You know, there's—we've got other hurdles with HUD and the federal government and those folks to deal with. So if there's a way, there's some language that might—could be amended in that ordinance to allow for certain circumstances with—I mean, we're dealing with federal land, federal funds. It's a challenge, but I understand what you're up against. And what I do also realize is your new— zoning ordinance has given the planning department a bigger stick than they've had, and I think there's some real opportunity for there being good quality control through that avenue also. But on behalf of the Housing Authority, I'm really just going to say if you can give some consideration, it would be appreciated because we would like to enhance something that could enhance the neighborhood, could really revitalize some of that while you're doing the same work with the roadway. And that's all I've got. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Romancey, 365 Woodlands Drive. I want to address line item 10 in the agenda tonight, and I would ask you to reconsider approving a moratorium on data centers. Data centers aren't the evil empire, the enemy, as the social media circus makes them out to be. Last week I listened to the data in here of how many millions the data center, the one and only that we have, has generated far more income, which benefits the city and the county and the schools than any other business that we have. And by limiting the future opportunity may hurt us, you, and the city more than we anticipate. So I'm not saying welcome them here, but if you approve a moratorium, then you're basically saying no across the board. If you have it open, you can say yes, no, modify the request, but I really think that taking a hard look at this, may be worthwhile for our benefit. Meta, the largest revenue producer in the city, this is your data, not mine, They paid $1.8 million in property tax. That goes a long way for everybody, for everything. They provided more than $2 million to the sponsorship grants to local schools, again, which benefits everybody. You don't hear about that from any other business that is in this county or city. They don't employ a whole lot of people, but the roughly 100 people that they do, it's fairly high average income, over $138,000. Again, probably exceeds most of the businesses here. So you get a lot of benefit from having them here, and by closing that door, even though it's a year moratorium, closing that door to look and select the potential vendors may be a disservice to us and everybody. And there's a big complaint about the water usage. 2% of the city's water goes to Meta. That's a very small fraction of the water used, and it's not like we have a limited supply of water. We've got a river down here. You've got an endless supply of water. It's a closed-loop system. It's not like they're expelling water out of their plant. So, again, think about this. Don't just take it for whatever Facebook meta, whatever you read on social media has to say, but look at the data, look at the benefits, look at the tradeoffs, And again, I'll just ask you to take a hard look at this before we just put a big stamp of no as a disapproval on this because there are some good benefits that may outweigh some of the detractors that you read about. I'll be open for any questions. If not, that's it.

Good evening. My name is Dennis Dressler. I resided in Sumner County for about 23 years now and a resident of the city of Gallatin for the past nine. First of all, and I hope this isn't inappropriate.

Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt. May we have your address, please? I'm sorry? Address, please.

Yeah, 1271 Plantation Boulevard in beautiful Gallatin, Tennessee. Anyway, first off, and once again, I hope this is not inappropriate, I want to thank the current city of Gallatin leadership team for their many years of exceptional service to our community. When you consider the statistics that anybody can look up, okay, with regard to safety and security for our residents via our law enforcement, fire department, and emergency services, it's excellent. When you consider the quality of services and infrastructure that the city provides to its residents, during significant and ongoing growth. It's excellent. When you look at fiscal responsibility and integrity, it's impeccable, and it's a highlight based on federal government financial audits over the years that have been done. The city operates with a surplus, and how many places can say that? Okay? A lot of them are in debt or they have to raise taxes. And then take a look by what we've all witnessed as residents with our property tax rates over the years. Congratulations and thank you for that. Now, that is not meant to be an endorsement of any candidates that are running in this election cycle, but rather a statement that the city of Gallatin, in my opinion, and in a lot of people I talk to, It's an outstanding and a nice, a very nice place to live, retire, raise a family, and enjoy recreational activities, et cetera. Neighbors know each other. They talk to each other, and they care about each other. We're not perfect, but I'm proud to be a resident, and I would suggest to those that are advertising that we need to make Gallatin nice again. Please, stop denigrating your own community. It's just wrong to send out things on social media that state that Gallatin is not a nice place to visit or live, because that's the impression people will get from those posts. They don't understand what it exactly is pointed towards. Okay? Now, with regard to the Phoenix project, as a resident, I would ask the leadership team to work together to determine creatively... Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Go ahead, I'm sorry. Council members point out that Phoenix is not on the agenda... Wait. Okay.

I just... I'm trying to talk about the process that we use. That's all. So I would say, with regard to anything you consider, okay such as uh... what the gentleman before me was talking about with the data centers everything is a process and what i'm asking is that the leadership team determined creatively and in a positive manner the best path forward on those the citizens of gallatin i believe expect all of the city's leadership team to work together for the benefit of our community I recall a continuous improvement meeting that I was involved in many years ago before I retired. One member of the team was continuously negative about almost every idea that was brought up for consideration. Finally, the director got up and said, Gary, quit telling us all the ways you think we are failing and help us succeed. Now, that room got quiet for a while, but then the process, and everything's a process, everything, doesn't matter what the business is, government, whatever it may be, okay? But it moved forward and yielded very positive results, continuous improvement. I would suggest to those here tonight that represent our city that that's a concept they need to emulate going forward. Work together for the betterment of the community, not partisan politics. That's all I have. Thank you for the time.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak this evening? You're welcome.

Hi. Hi, my name is Ashley Weeks, and I'm from Gallatin, but I live at 1837 Santa Clara in Alameda, California now. So I'm coming to also speak about line item 10, about the moratorium on data centers. And I just wanted to provide the perspective that I actually work at OpenAI, so I have some pretty inside information when it comes to that. And I know the news can be a little scary, But I see where AI can actually detect pancreatic cancer three years before doctors or the human eye, which is life-saving, where it's actually detecting wildfires before they're even there, which is saving communities across the U.S., At the moment, there's a 1.6% vacancy in North America data center markets. This is the hottest time for Gallatin, and I'm afraid for you to take us out of that. market or out of that conversation with a 12-month moratorium because it's moving quickly. And everything has shifted since META. This is a new market. Before it was about tax breaks and subsidies. Now it's about where we can control the narrative, where landowners, where the community can basically ask what you want if there is a welcome environment. So I know there's two concerns from the community. Clearly, my home, my community, and the council, right? Do I have control? So those two shifts are significant these days. I would say that we need more time to understand. Microsoft is actually investing $19.6 million in a community of 28,000, excuse me, in tax revenue, tax benefits. So I have to say that. and a community of 28,000 right now. So that's some big numbers, right? I have to put my glasses on since I graduated. Water is actually the biggest conversation online, which was true before. Now data centers, Microsoft's latest data center is actually 100% closed loop and does not require new water. So the conversation has changed significantly and being transparent and being open and having those conversations with the community and with the potential of having a data center come and investing that level of money into the city. I just want to say I have concerns with us completely taking ourselves out of that conversation, which is what a 12 month moratorium would do. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Here comes the short guy.

Good evening, Council. Rick Horio, 221 Woodlake. I got a lot of things to say, a lot of ground to cover, and I fear I'm going to run out of time, so I'm just going to go ahead and get started. I was here last week listening to a couple things. I'm here to voice my support for the moratorium for apartment applications and development. I also watched and rewatched the video last night of the livestream, and I also read most of the 71 pages of the notes that were in the agenda about this topic last week. So rather than give you my feelings on the matter, what I'd rather do is speak to some of these things, just give us some thought-provoking things to think about, as well as really just kind of pose some questions, because I'm just kind of ignorant about a lot of things and would just really be curious to know. So here we go. Within the agenda in pages 124 to 128, there were 10 objections, if you will, 10 reasons for why you should not support this moratorium. I'm not going to be able to address all of them, but I will address some of them. A lot of the language that was used in this, words like hopefully, may, can, possibly, likely, they don't give me a lot of confidence that the things that are being stated were actually things that are going to occur. Now, I get that Not everything can be predicted. I can appreciate that. Reason number one, objection number one, is that there is an existing plan. I think it's called Plan Gallatin. I didn't really know what that was until a couple weeks ago. That was adopted in 2023. And the basis of that plan being only three years old is the reason why it's not stale. That may or may not be true. I actually don't know. I'm not a planner, so the experts here are. I work in fintech, so for me, a three-month plan is actually stale. So a three-year plan, I don't know. I don't know how recent or how stale those kind of plans are. But that's not enough of a reason in and of itself for me to... except as an objection. Reason number four, and repeated in reason number 10, desire for more affordable homes. There's a quote that Gallatin's younger professionals would like smaller homes on small lots with some expressing they want to live in Gallatin, but are not ready to buy a home. Now this language is interesting to me because we're talking about a moratorium on apartments, which I believe are all rentals. This quote here is indicating that people who want to live and remain in Gallatin want to one day have affordable housing that they can actually purchase. I don't think that this moratorium actually affects that. Reason number five, unknown development plans. There is a topic of it's possible that some developers have already made plans, have already invested time and money into things that haven't even been brought before the council. Well, once again, I work in fintech. We spend a lot of time and money trying to get sales, and sometimes they don't pan out. Sometimes we're told no, and other times we're told we're going to put a pause on this decision, and we just have to accept that, and we have to just kind of move on. That's life, and that's business. Reason number six, opinion that road infrastructure is not inadequate. This is more my curiosity, what the criteria is for determining what is adequate or not, because the perception of the folks who drafted that is that it's not inadequate. My personal perception is that it is inadequate. I'm more than happy to see the data that would show that it is not inadequate and just kind of see where the plan is. Reason number seven, fiscal impact of less fee revenue. This is interesting. I think it's worth considering and thinking about and discussing. I have never run a business myself, but I am familiar with managing multi-million dollar annual budgets. So I know what it's like to go through budget season, be told no, and then sometimes you have to reallocate funds from somewhere else, and sometimes you have to go without that year. Reason number nine, singling out apartments to blame for the traffic seems arbitrary, was the quote. I actually don't completely disagree with that. It quite possibly might be arbitrary. A case could be made that it's arbitrary, but that's precisely my argument for many of these stated objections to the moratorium that a lot of these reasons are also in and of themselves arbitrary. And we can avoid arbitrariness by offering actual data points, and if not data, a precedent, which would actually be data. Was that my timer?

Not yet. You have 47 seconds.

27 seconds. All right.

I'm going to have to skip.

47. 47. All right. Two areas worth considering. Fiscal impact, which we already talked about. The legal impact. Ms. Haye McCauley, you're the subject matter expert. I have every reason to trust you. And so I don't have an opinion on the matter because I'm not a legal expert. But I have dealt with many legal and compliance officers in the day. And I know that a lot of times this comes to the interpretation of the law. So that's really up to risk tolerance of the counsel to determine which risk tolerance is to a potential lawsuit i'm going to skip this part uh final thoughts i actually don't think my attendance here my words make any kind of difference to be honest but i come here because i want to be able to be an example to my kids that sometimes you're going to stand up for what you believe in and speak your mind i remember hearing recently that there's somebody that called this oh next time maybe at the end wrap it up just wrap it up i All right, I'll skip to my last point. My last point is just my charge and my exhortation to everybody in this room is just to be kind to one another. I think it's quite easy to demonize each other and to be like it's us against them, where I'm trying to be Switzerland and find the best in everybody. That's what I'm attempting to do and try and do what's best for Gallatin. This is my home as well. Five years as of today. And while, last thing, I promise, while I might disagree with a lot of decisions that are coming from this council recently, I can also simultaneously appreciate that you all had a role in making Gallatin the attractive place it is to live today and why I wanted to move here. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.

Anyone else awaiting an opportunity to speak?

Good evening to everybody. Missy Colson. I live at 997 Westbrook Drive in Gallatin. And I guess one of the things, I did a lot of research, and I know everybody thinks there's some perception that we need to build more apartments. That we need more apartments to get employers to come here. I can truthfully say, if we went to the expense, but from my own personal experience and knowledge, you have employees here, they're high-end employees, qualified that any employer would want to grab. But they are going to Nashville. When I was doing some study on about the apartments and what the perception is as far as the type of apartments we have, Gallatin's considered a luxury, pretty high-end area. And therefore, higher end incomes. And where are those incomes coming from? Nashville. We need to take the jobs away from Nashville. We need to get the companies in here. You would find out that... There is plenty of people that would be more than happy to give up their jobs if the jobs were here in Gallatin. I can tell you from personal experience last week, I went to a doctor's appointment down at Centennial. Do you realize it took me longer to get down? Here I am going down 386 off of Greenlee. It took me longer to get to 65 than it took me to get in the parking garage all the way to Centennial. Now, that's not good. It took me over 40 minutes to get to 65. No accidents. It was high volume. Never at one point on 386 could I drive at speed limit. Never. And boy, when Indian legs, they unload onto 386, you can kiss it goodbye. You better be having a sandwich with you or a biscuit. But this is routine. And it's like that, not to that extent, on 109 when I go down that way. Personally, I know tons of people in my church. I never found a job in Sumner. I worked in Nashville. I worked at Metro Center. I worked down on West End. Those jobs do not exist here. And so, yes, there's some good employers here, but to say we need to build more apartments, no, I don't think so. One of the things currently, as far as inventory, and this does not include the subsidized or... how do I want to phrase it, the more affordable apartments, we have 4,448 apartments here. I was stunned because we actually have about 21 different complexes. Now, in that, I did not include... those affordable housing and as far as the subsidies, the federal and state subsidized entities. So that's just that. Then on the other aspect of apartments, and again, I don't have, it's hard for mixed use to get the data of what rental apartments are gonna be because they are mixed use, because they're a combination of things. So this data that I have down that's currently on the books does not include Chartwell Commons, McCain Station, or the crossings at Hidden Creek. What this includes is the Gallatin Gap, Caldwell Place, Nexus, I'll probably mispronounce this, Argento 386, and Triple B Apartments. Those are small, though. But it was 1,342. Now, I think from standpoint, again, when you look at people, once they get married and start a family, they're not going to stay in an apartment. They want to be where they can have a starter home. And I recommend having things go more that route. Wrap it up. Okay, I'm going to wrap it up. So I would ask that we go and make a moratorium on this. I don't feel it should affect the subsidized apartments, though. And that's my opinion. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else with comments on the gender-related items this evening? Seeing no one, public recognition on agenda-related items is closed. And I have two proclamations to present this morning, and I will start with the proclamation for Constitution Week. And so I would welcome Ms. Rice and her mother from the Jethro Sumner chapter of the Dollars of the American Revolution forward.

Thank you.

Over here. This is Patricia and Deborah Rice with the Daughters of the American Revolution. And I want to commend the organization just for their commitment to every year honor Constitution Week and stay true to their commitment to educate. the greater community, but certainly the younger community, too, about the importance of the Constitution. So I have a proclamation to read, and then we will present it and take a photo. This says, whereas we the people did ordain and establish a Constitution for the United States of America to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity, And whereas it is important for all citizens to fully understand the provisions, principles, and meaning of the Constitution so they can support, preserve, and defend it against encroachment. And whereas September 17th through 23rd of 2026 marks the 239th anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention. And whereas the President and Congress of the United States have designated the week of September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week, and whereas the citizens of Gallatin do enjoy the freedoms guaranteed to us through this guardian of our liberties, I, Paige Brown, Mayor of Gallatin, do hereby proclaim the week of September 17th through 23rd as Constitution Week and invite every citizen and institution of Gallatin to join in the national commemoration. With that, I'm going to present to you, and I would welcome you to make comments if you want.

Thank you so much. And now at this time, I'm going to welcome the crew with the recovery courts up this way.

Yes, you too, Tracy. We have some really important people in the community here right now to recognize National Recovery Month. And I'll let Tracy Bryant, who is the queen of helping people change their lives in Sunderland County as far as I'm concerned, introduce everyone, and then I'll make more remarks. Go, Tracy.

Just introduce everyone.

And say something about Recovery Courts if you want.

Okay. I'm Tracy Bryan. I'm the director of the Recovery Court program. I've been here since 2003. I have kids. I have grandchildren. And I want to do all I can to try to make the community a better place, a safer place. Recovery Court is a program that works with justice-involved individuals, helping them change their life and get back on track. We offer strict case management, strong case management services. We offer housing, safe, affordable housing. We're there to do anything you need. We work with the city of Gallatin, with the Sheriff's Department, and we're just trying to love people until they can love themselves again. So here with me tonight, I have some of my board members, and it's Kim Norfleet, Kit Sanyard, and Chad Long. And I appreciate them being here with me to support us. And if you have any questions or want to ask anything about Recovery Court, I'm here.

When I say that Ms. Bryan has made a difference, I truly believe she has. I believe that Sumner County Recovery Courts are a model for success for other parts of the country. The recidivism rate of those that go through the recovery courts in Sumner County is significantly lower than anywhere else in the entire country. And so I say that's because of you all and the judges who pour so much into the individuals to make a difference in their lives. And they're proving success in that. And so I'm truly honored to present this this evening. This says, whereas recovery courts are a key component of reform of our criminal justice system, and whereas there are now more than 4,200 recovery and specialized courts nationwide that have served more than 1.5 million individuals, and whereas 82 recovery courts now exist across Tennessee to include adult drug courts, veteran treatment courts, juvenile and family drug courts, adult mental health courts, DUI courts, human trafficking court, and safe baby courts, And whereas Recovery Court of Sumner County has recorded 224 graduates since its inception in 2003, as tracked by the 18th Judicial District, graduates from the local program have achieved a recidivism rate that is 29.5% lower than the national average. And whereas recovery courts can significantly improve education, employment, housing, and financial stability, promote family reunification, reduce foster care placements, and decrease the number of babies born with neonatal abstinence syndrome. And whereas recovery courts facilitate community partnerships, bringing together public safety officials, courts, and public health and treatment professionals. And whereas recovery courts demonstrate that through the observance of National Recovery Month, we will continue to work to improve the lives of those affected by mental and or substance use disorders and acknowledge the influence of all organizations and individuals who work to break the chains of these disorders. Now, therefore, I, Paige Brown, do hereby ask citizens to join me in celebrating this September as National Recovery Month and to support compelling programs and events, raising awareness and educating our community on available services to help make the journey of recovery possible. And my sincere gratitude to all of you. I do want to mention that Kent Sidner was, when she was not retired yet, the director of Sumner County Prevention Coalition. So thank you all so much for what you do.

We can give them a round of applause.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Beyond that, I do have some events I want to share with you. But first, I also want to acknowledge the incredible work that was done by our Gallatin Fire Department, a lot of employees with the city of Gallatin, and several businesses, volunteers, and community members last week for the 25th anniversary of 9-11. The service here was particularly meaningful. Chief Beaman's remarks were incredible. And I had so many people tell me how much it really resonated with them this year. And there was a lot of work that went into that by the fire department and all other departments of the city. And so I want to recognize that. Also, Alexander Funeral Home, who did their annual field of flags and held their own program and fed first responders. The Gallatin Center for Rehabilitation and Healing also fed first responders on that day. Charter Senior Living. Welcome to all of the first responders for an ice cream social. And I want to mention a really sweet email that I got from a lady who lives on Buffalo Ridge. And she wanted to acknowledge her neighbors who had put in the time and effort and expense to create a flag tribute commemorating the day in their neighborhood. And she just thought it was really nice and important and meant a lot to that neighborhood. Don't know who they are, but they live on Buffalo Ridge. And a neighbor of yours was quite appreciative. There are several events coming up I want you to be aware of. The Shalom Zone Hygiene Pantry is tomorrow from 10 until 2. The Dozer Day Career Fair happens on the 17th at 2310 Nashville Pike. Pinot and Purses to Benefit Habitat for Humanity is also on the 17th and the third Thursday. is on the square with an artist, a duo called Gypsy Outfit. I have not heard them. The person who organizes tells me they are fabulous. And my brother told me he listened to some of their music and really liked it too. So I would encourage you to check out this final third Thursday this week. The 18th has a grand opening and ribbon cutting for the Sumner County Resource Authority. And this weekend is the Gallatin-Sertoma Truck and Tractor Pull at Triple Creek Park. That will go Friday and Saturday. On the 19th is Brandon Howell's birthday. Saturday is Market Day at the Gallatin Farmer's Market. And I don't really know what this means, but also talk like a pirate day at the Farmer's Market. Sounds like there may be some kids particularly compelled to want to go. Also, Dozer Day at the Barn happens on that day. The Gallatin Farm to Tables that evening. Another Hygiene Pantry happens on the 22nd at unlimited potential from 10 until 2. The Shalom Zone has another Hygiene Pantry on the 23rd. And then next Friday is Good Morning Gallatin. John Isbell, Sumner County Mayor, will be speaking. The Isaiah won 17 golf tournaments that day. The Mayor's Cup Challenge, which is a football game between Station Camp and Gallatin High School, happens on the evening of the 25th. The Run for Recovery 1K and 5K is at Triple Creek Park on the 26th. Sumner County Recovery Fest, which is also a really neat event that happens each year in Sumner County, happens at Triple Creek from 10 until 1 p.m. And then the Antique and Classic Car Show is that evening at the Civic Center Upper Parking Lot. Courtney and Jimmy's birthday is on the 29th. And the Gallatin Scarecrow Hunt deadline is September 29th, and that's sponsored by the Gallatin Chamber. That concludes the mayor's comments this evening, and we're going to move on to the regular agenda. Item 1 is the public hearing on Ordinance 02608-60, and Councilman Jones will introduce.

Thank you, Mayor. An ordinance of the City of Gallatin, Sumner County, Tennessee zoning 255.32 acres to the IR Industrial Restrictive District located east of Highway 31 and south of Bright's Lane. Authorizing the revision to be indicated on the official zoning atlas, repealing conflicting ordinances provided for severability and provided for an effective date. Public hearing is open.

Public hearing is open. If you'd like to speak to this item, we welcome you to the podium at this time. Seeing no one, jumping up, indicating they wish to speak. Public hearing on Ordinance 02608-60 is closed. Item 2 is public hearing on Resolution R2609-76. Councilman Givance.

Thank you, Mayor. It's a resolution establishing the crossings at Eden Creek Infrastructure Development District. The declared public hearing is open.

Public hearing is open. If you'd like to speak, you may come forward. Again, seeing no rush of people forward, I'll declare the public hearing on Resolution R2609-76 closed. Item 3 is second reading on Ordinance O2607-55, Councilman Jones.

Thank you, Mayor. In ordinance of the City of Gallatin, Sumner County, Tennessee, amending Plan Gallatin Community Character Map and Sub-Area Designations Map by changing the community character areas from the rural character area to the general urban character area and expanding the number four Gallatin Gateway Industrial Center sub-area onto a portion of two parcels. And totaling 255.32 acres located east of Highway 31 and south of Brights Lane. Motion to move.

Motion to approve by Councilman Jones, second by Vice Mayor Hayes. At the end of the floor for discussion, questions, comments. Councilman G. Bonds.

Thank you, Mayor. I still have a problem by changing rural to a general urban with a risk I can take without having any idea of what could be put in there. So I'm not going to vote yes on it.

Anyone else? This is second reading on Ordinance 02607-55. All in favor indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed indicate by saying no. The motion passes 5-1. Item 4 is second reading on Ordinance 02608-62. Vice Mayor Hayes.

Yeah, this is an ordinance appropriating $5,007.50 from insurance recovery for repairs to the 2000... 14, Sutton-Quint Fire Apparatus. Motion to approve. Second.

Question by Vice Mayor Hayes, second by Councilman Juvans. Any questions? Any discussion? Okay, this is second reading on Ordinance O2608-62. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no. It does pass unanimously. Item 5 is second reading on Ordinance O2608-63, Councilman Phan.

Thank you, Mayor. This is an ordinance appropriating $1,000 from insurance recovery... for reimbursement of the insurance deductible relating to the September 12, 2025 accident involving the 2021 Pierce Enforcer fire engine. And I so move. Say again?

Motion by Councilman Fann, second by Councilman Carter. Any questions, any discussion? This is second reading on Ordinance 02608-63. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Passes unanimously. Item six, second reading on Ordinance 02608-64. Councilman Alexander.

Thank you, Mayor. This is an ordinance appropriating funds in the total amount of $355,000 from natural gas reserves for a compressed natural gas trailer. And I so move. Second.

Question by Councilman Alexander. Second by Councilman Phan. Opening the floor for any discussion. Seeing none, this is second reading on Ordinance O2608-64. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, please say no. It does pass unanimously. Item 7 is second reading on Ordinance O2608-65. Vice Mayor Hayes, if you would.

Yeah, this is an ordinance authorizing funds in a total amount of $2,950,000 from water, sewer, 2,025 bond sales for the nanostone, ceramic UL, Ultra filtration project. Ultra filtration project. Motion to approve.

Motion by Vice Mayor Hayes, second by Councilman Carter. In his defense, there wasn't a proper space in the verbiage. Any questions? Any discussion on this? Okay, this is second reading on the ordinance 02608-65. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no. Passes unanimously. Item A, this first reading on Ordinance O2601-4, Councilman Vance is recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. It's an ordinance of the City of Gallatin, Seminole County, Tennessee, approving a preliminary master development plan for Okinawa Center on 4.91 acres located south of Longolo Park and east of Lower Stepson Camp Creek Road, authorizing the revision to be indicated on the official zoning atlas, repeating conflicting ordinance, providing for servability and providing for an effective date. Motion to discuss. Second.

Motion by Councilman Givance to discuss. A second by Councilman Alexander.

All in favor say aye.

Aye. Opposed? Floor is open for discussion.

I may not need to do that.

I don't know why I did that. But anyway, the floor is open for discussion. Councilman Alexander.

Thank you, Mayor. I had a lot of questions at our work session concerning this development. When we moved to Gallatin, our welcome to Gallatin moment was our storage unit flooding. And if you've not gone through that, there is no fun in it. There are things that cannot be replaced. And we lost a lot of stuff due to flooding. something I do not want to go through again. I listen to the engineer and talk about how somehow lowering the height of the development, especially in the back part, whatever the new name for storage facilities is, and paving that or having metal roofing on there is going to actually help the nearby creek. I'm sorry. I have a hard time understanding that, and I certainly saw it with the windsock development. I was told multiple times, we're going to take care of it, and I was still flooded out multiple times. So I just can't see possibly if our city engineer or city planner, who is also the flood water manager. I don't want to flood plane manager wears many hats, but you know, if they wanted to tell me that there was substantial information that might change my mind, I'd be welcome to hearing it. But otherwise I just can't be in support of this. Thank you.

Can we call Brian up to answer that?

Are you comfortable doing that? I mean, do you have the information you need?

And if you don't have information, we can get it next week.

I can tell you that they referenced last week that there was a summary report. I did attach that summary report. So last week you had just some email correspondence that had kind of gone back and forth between them. Now you have the report attached to your packet. So hopefully that can give you a little bit of information. I know From our standpoint, we're still having an outside consultant review that data for us to kind of give us a better feel on what to do. But as long as they can meet the ordinance standards, we can issue them a floodplain development permit. We set a minimum standard for them to be able to do that. And if they can meet it, then yes, we'll be able to issue them the floodplain development permit. And there's always, yes, possibly going to be some risk because you're near a flood zone. But at some point, we have to draw a line in the sand and say, hey, what are we willing to allow people to spend their money on? And if they want to go ahead and spend their money to develop this place, You know, if they meet our regulations, I don't see where we would have the reason to say no to them at that point.

But following up on what you said, if they don't, you won't issue it. Do you know when the outside analysis will be complete?

I don't have an answer on that yet. But I would suggest that I think we can move this forward at first reading today and then figure that out in the interim period. And if it needs more time before we get to second reading, we'll have those discussions with the applicant and possibly defer the second reading meeting. But at this point... They've given us enough information that says we think we can meet the regulations. And so that's why we've kind of brought it back to you and put it back on the agenda.

That's what I was going to suggest is that, yeah, we could move it forward because we've got plenty of time to look at that. And I appreciate you putting that in the packet and everything for us. What about one more question about the, we had talked about this before when he briefly brought it up the other night. I remember when they first brought it up months ago, we talked about the roof pitch, all that and everything. Have y'all looked at the architecture of it and anything like that? Have y'all seen that?

We did. I believe there was some conditions. I'd have to go back and double check what the conditions were, but I think some of the conditions were adjusted to address some of that. But I'll have an answer for you on the next time if you want.

That's fine, or I'll get with you next week or so. Thanks.

Councilman Jumats.

Thank you, Mayor. I have to agree with Councilman Alexander. I have a issue when they say that by putting concrete and roof, that's going to help the water. But the issue I have the most is that when I went back and looked at the meetings again, when that got brought us the first time, we got told that a lot of dirt was brought on that property on the floodplain. So that's where I have a problem because a lot of dirt was brought, looks like, without any permit and any authorization. And now we're telling that they're going to remove some of that dirt to make things happen. So my question there is that... How can we approve something when the base was not done legally? That means if they brought dirt on a floodplain without authorization, how can we move forward and keep approving something, you know, when... and the base was done, uh, like I say, not, not legally. So, um, I can vote yes for that, but, uh, an amendment I would like to make, uh, is to deny the exception, the request on the architectural part, because I think you guys, uh, recommended that. And, um, There was an issue too with the parking, so I would like to see that address on the parking calculation for the rest, the supposedly restaurant part was going to be there. So I make a motion to deny the exemption for the architectural part.

Would you not do it just with removing that condition?

What was the architecture? What was the...

What was the architecture? They wanted to remove the 75% stone on the roadside.

Okay. So is your motion to deny the project due to the architecture? No. Just that exception. All right. Is that an amendment? We already have a motion.

We made a motion.

No, no.

We made a motion to deny the architecture, and so I was trying to figure out how to make it work within the framework. I think we would need a motion first.

I'll make a motion we send it on first.

On the first reading. Okay. Motion by Vice Mayor Hayes. Okay. Second by Councilman Jones. Now we have an amendment, right? Okay. So we have a motion and a second, which then allows for the addition of an amendment. Yes.

Is there a second? If I may, the condition actually says revise the architectural elevations of the storage buildings to meet the 70% brick stone requirement on all facades. So that is part of the ordinance now that they would have to meet the 70% brick requirement.

All right. Remove my motion.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Rose, for that clarification. Now, we have a motion and a second to pass on first reading. And then we went through the amendment discussion right now. But if there's further discussion on this before we vote, now would be the time.

So it's already in the plan that they've already made the exception.

Well, it is one of the conditions of approval. So it would then meet the concerns raised by the condition that's in there. So there's nothing that needs to be done to make it happen differently.

I believe they initially requested the exception, and staff didn't feel like it was necessary. an appropriate request for this particular project. And so we put the condition in that they meet the 70% brick and stone.

The parking requirement is also a condition.

It's already in there. He pulled it. Yeah, they said no.

It's the one motion on the floor right now. Yeah, it's part of the PMDP. Any further questions or discussion? Okay, this is first reading on Ordinance 02601-4. On favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no.

No.

Okay, anybody voting no besides Councilman Givens and Councilman Alexander? So it passes first reading 422. Item 9 is first reading on Ordinance O2609-66. Councilman Jumats.

Thank you, Mayor. It's an ordinance of the City of Gallatin, Seminole County, Tennessee, enacting a 12-month moratorium on accepting and processing new applications for apartment development. authorizing the revision to be indicated on the official zoning ordinance, repeating conflicting ordinance, providing for severability, and providing for ineffective debt, and I so move.

Okay, I have a motion and a second on first reading. Opening the floor for discussion. Okay, go ahead, Councilman Gibbons.

Thank you, Mayor. I agree with Mr. Roger, who can speak. On behalf of the housing authority, I would not like to get that blocked if necessary. So I'm wondering if there is a way to add a language part that authorize them to come in front of the council to apply for their new project if they have you know to put that in there but for them for the housing authority only do not just exempt the galton housing authority property or just do that make it simple

I don't want to necessarily say that this is going to be the effect of doing that, but we were trying to not call out specific type, you know, one entity here or one entity there or something like that in order to make the ordinance seemed that it wasn't biased in some manner against some person or some entity, right? Or vice versa for an entity or another. So I had spoken to Ben Allen in the city attorney's office, And we knew that there had been some discussion last week about this particular topic, but felt that it was more something that the council kind of needed to maybe work out before. You know, we didn't put any language in the ordinance. And I will point out, we did add the language and gave you an optional version where... I didn't bring my copy of it, but we did have an extra little tidbit that was put in there regarding... I'm trying to remember, Susan. What did we add to this?

That was the data center. I think you're thinking about the data center.

I think we added something on both sides.

There's an optional amended ordinance.

Yeah, and there should be some red text. Are you seeing any red text on there?

Ms. Hamakali, and if you don't want to answer, you don't have to, but would the federal government actually even honor our moratorium when it comes to their housing authority and their commitment to fair housing? their property.

It wouldn't matter. You wouldn't want to get wrapped up with them anyway. You're not kidding. I wouldn't. You're talking about millions of dollars.

I'm using that as a reason why we could set them separately from any other private properties.

Rose, you added any apartment development or apartment redevelopment within the CD5 zone.

Microphones. That was it. That's the downtown district. CD5 was the downtown area, and we wanted to make that. Since that had also been discussed, and I thought... pretty well supported. We added that as an optional amended version of the ordinance. But since it wasn't part of the motion or anything, we attached it as a separate version that you can determine if you want to vote on that version or on a different version, on the one that was in there. And if you make more amendments tonight, then you can vote on that amended one and add to that or however you want to do it. But... Frankly, I mean, I've stood here and told you multiple times that I don't agree with the city enacting a moratorium on apartments. The easiest way to not affect the housing authority is to not enact a moratorium. You won't have to worry then about any sort of person having a legal argument against you for singling out the housing authority on one side if you just don't take action on enacting it to begin with.

Thank you, Mr. Rives. It does remind me, I wanted to respond to two particular comments that were made earlier during public recognition. One, I do not say, I think I would be fair in saying that there's not a single person sitting up in here that is arguing that we want more apartments right now in the city of Gallatin. We're just trying to follow the letter of the law. and respect property rights, I guess. And then as for the perspectives that were offered from our department heads, there was the comment made about that there was no data. What was asked for was the perspectives on what the impact of a potential moratorium would be from that particular department head's perspective. So it wasn't... And I do understand all of the concerns, but I also understand the concerns from the public, because it has been something that... that certainly became apparent in recent years. And maybe just for the public's clarification, I think what happened was a bit of a perfect storm, where some of the apartments that had been approved for quite some time, along with some new ones, all kind of came into being at the same time because of the market demand. I do not believe that we are going to see that same rash in any way, shape, or form in the future. And unfortunately, the rental market has become an only option for a lot of young people. I think you may have heard me say in recent weeks that the average age of first-time home ownership is now 40 years of age, and that young people cannot seem to um be in a situation where they could actually afford a first home because of our inflated housing costs that have happened since covid and really post recession because that's when the inventory of available housing really started to decline so it's a difficult situation but at the end of the day there are a lot of people who make very good wages who have to depend on renting until they are able to get to the place where they can save up What this body does with this moratorium is up to you all. Mr. Councilman Fann, you're recognized.

I want to make a suggestion that we move this to six months. And the reason for that, I've talked with three different realtors in the last week, all from a different area. They all three say the market is changing. If the market's changing, I think we may be a little hasty in saying a full year, because a lot can happen, especially during the midterm elections.

I go with that. I second that motion.

A motion and a second to amend it to be six months rather than a year.

Which option are we going with?

I made a motion for the original. I think I'm going to use the same that you did for the previous one. let time to move it to second reading and we have public hearing and we have time to maybe find a way for the housing authority so my motion was for the original ordinance and on on that note i think the optional endorsement you had it did not include the housing authority just called cd5 correct yeah can you come back before

couple weeks, can you come back with another option that has CD5 and the Housing Authority on there? Figure out a way to add the Housing Authority is what I'm saying. Like an amendment, now we can do that. Okay.

So I have a motion and a second on the amendment. Are we going back?

He's got a question. Okay.

So you're ready to vote on that? Amendment? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Say no. No. Okay. So I have 4-2.

Am I overthinking it? I mean, I'm not going to say that I'm for the moratorium on the data centers or this, but... I mean, we can say no, right? If they come up with something, we can say no. I mean, I don't like the negativity it brings towards Gallatin about businesses coming in. I mean, you know, they just look at it like it's negative to me. I'm just common sense, so I don't know. You know, it looks bad on Gallatin to be turning people away.

I've said this before. I do think a moratorium, when you hear the term, because a lot of people won't. understand the reason behind the moratorium. And I know that we put in there it's to study. Um, of course we have a transportation plan update in process, but, um, some people will just automatically assume that a moratorium is, um, associated with what one would typically think and that would be an infrastructure failure of utilities like sewer or water or electricity and so it could have that kind of messaging and i think you heard miss fate speak early on about a neighboring community that did a similar moratorium and then they had two large retail centers decide not to follow through at that time so you're not you're not wrong to be concerned about the risk councilman

Thank you, Mayor. But again, we have to be realistic on what we're talking about. When I say we have no problem with infrastructure, you're sitting on the electric board. You were at the same meeting I was when the electric director said we had an issue with the north of the city with no backup. And he will not accept more commitments to the north of the city until TVA bring us the new line to the new transformer. And I talked to him after that. And the Nexus actually had removed some single-family and townhouse to bring electricity to the apartment because the apartment was not going to be provided with electricity.

That's so sweet.

Yeah, but when? Again, we don't know when. I don't know when it's going to rain next time either. Yeah.

Let me interrupt. That substation being powered has nothing to do with this moratorium. And obviously, certain developments that are in the works are limited until that is powered. And so, in essence, that is a moratorium without a declaration of a moratorium. So it serves some degree of a purpose, right, aligned with what you guys are supporting.

And I'll state that this moratorium, we specifically state it's for the purpose to study the transportation network.

Right.

So if they look at it, they'll understand.

If they look at it, they'll understand.

You've got to realize our neighboring community down the street did it for 12 months, and I don't think it hurt them too bad.

Will of this body.

Caller for the question.

Okay, so we have the motion as amended, which would be first reading on Ordinance 02609-66. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no.

No.

Passes with a vote of 4-2 as it was amended on first reading. Item 10 is first reading on Ordinance 02609-67. Councilman DuMonts.

Thank you, Mayor. It's an ordinance of the city of Gallatin, Sumner County, Tennessee, enacting a 12-month moratorium on accepting and processing new applications for data-centered development, authorizing the revision to be indicated on the official zoning ordinance, repealing conflicting ordinances, providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. Motion to approve. Second.

Question by Councilman Givant, second by Councilman Alexander, opening the floor for discussion.

Councilman Givant. Thank you, Mayor. Thanks, Susan, for adding the Section 3 on telecommunication. I think that was needed. And, you know, the... The planner made it really clear and thankful for you can work on that, that it's made because we live in an unknown condition. We need to figure if that's going to hurt us or not. There's a lot of things out there. There's a lot of pros, a lot of cons. It's a... but at the end of the day, we need to protect our community. There is stuff I heard during public comments. I want to come back. When, and again, When I hear that that generated more income to the city, I talked about it last week, the income go to the IDB and the IDB do whatever they want. So we haven't seen that much money. So they are not the largest revenue provider on tax for the city. I agree they give grants to local school. But again, they give grant with the money they don't pay on tax. So, you know, if I don't pay my taxes, I can probably give a lot more money that I give every month. And about the water, the closed loop supply, again, that's great because it's called closed loop. But You know, I'm sitting here near that rack, and I can assure you I can get the heat of that rack coming right to me. They go all the way to 100 feet. 85, 190 degrees Fahrenheit, the processor when they're working. So imagine the amount of processor on that building and the closed loop still evaporate and that's why they need water every day and they take water every day. So I think that's necessary. Like Mayor Brown said, we already have a big one and that should be sufficient for us. So I have no problem doing that and studying the impact of what that can do to the community. And if they come back and say there is no impact, great. And hopefully, we'll learn a lot of things. So I would vote yes for it.

I really appreciate the... Actually, all the comments this evening were very thoughtful, and I, in general, appreciate every perspective that was offered. I just feel very strongly that this data center moratorium that's popping up all across the country is in response to... The media, lack of a better term, circus that it became, I believe strongly that we as a city government should thoroughly evaluate the impacts of any industry. And while a data center like a hyperscale center like META can be very impactful to a community and would have to go through all of the due diligence to be considered as to whether it could actually be served, there are other industries that could have just as more of an impact but they also come with toxicity or they come with um i mean i'll just i'll say out loud what i've said i'd rather have um data centers in our country than um with um our global competitors and i would rather have a data center in gallatin than i would a dog food factory because that stinks but i mean So, and that all data centers are not equal. There are all different scales of data centers. I fully support putting some clarification within our code that better describes the various types of data centers, but... to just pull data centers out and say, oh, we're going to put a moratorium on those. If a data center came to us, and I know for a fact that Mr. Kellogg's had some inquiries that have wanted a certain kind of service, and he just tells them, no, that is not something that our system is equipped to adequately serve at this time. That's how we deal with any kind of industry that's making requirements on our city, or not making requirements, asking for commitment of our infrastructure that could be to the detriment of our citizens. We have to evaluate every single industry that way. And so I just think it's... a little short-sighted to act like data centers are this particularly negative impact, where in a lot of ways they can be a very positive impact. And I liked what the lady pointed out about when we did the meta project, it was new. It was all new. And now we're in a world where Gallatin could potentially ask for so many things as a benefit if they were to come to our community. So I just offer those remarks. Councilman Alexander.

Thank you, Mayor. I can support this for two reasons. Number one, I believe Ms. Bates has said on multiple times that there's already a second building that is completely empty. If there was one that wanted to come in and put in a data center, we've got a building. So I can support that. But also just with some of the things that Mr. Rose brought up and some of the things this body brought up through discussion, there's a lot of this I think we need to explore and nail down. And so I can support the moratorium while we study what is a data center, are there categories of it, All of these different things, I think, are things we have to work out. If we don't, we'll be on the backside of them. Thank you.

Just to be clear, that spec property for the co-location facility is privately owned, not our city's property. Councilman Pan?

I'll go back to what I proposed before. I think six months will be plenty on this until we do get to explore that.

Question by Councilman Pan.

I'm sorry, Mayor, I didn't hear. A motion to amend to reduce the time frame from 12 months to six months.

I feel like by doing that, if somebody's looking at coming in here, they don't feel like they've got to wait a full year.

I think any motion should be seconded for discussion. What now?

I think any motion should be seconded so we can open for discussion. That's why I'm seconding it.

I remember a month or two ago a lady was talking about the impact it had on the land. You know, like these businesses come in. I know I work out in Galton all the time myself, and I've been to a lot of businesses. I ain't going to say no names, but, like, we got it eating over here. My dad worked there for 35, 40 years, and the ground is gone. It's a brownfield. You can't really do nothing with it. I mean, is the data center, is that the way it's going to be? You know, is it going to affect the soil for 100 years from now? I mean, does anybody know that? No. That, no. Like some of these sites I've been on, I mean, it's like walking on the moon when you go to these places and they keep it behind the, you know, nobody sees it unless you're back there looking. But, I mean, I've kind of been in the back of the buildings. But I just, I don't know, you know, I'm just talking, I guess.

Any other comments before we vote on the proposed amendment? All in favor of the amendment to change it to a six-month moratorium, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. No. I have three nos and three yeses, and so that gives me tie-breaking authority, so I would amend it to six months.

Mayor, can you clarify the three and three?

Councilman Jones, Councilman Alexander, and Councilman Givance for no, and then Councilman Carter, Councilman Phan, and Vice Mayor Hayes for ayes. Okay.

And I need to point something out as well. Councilman Givance mentioned a new Section 3. So if you want that Section 3, you're going to have to make a motion to amend because that's not what is on your agenda. Okay.

Yeah, for sure. I'll make a motion to amend section three.

And just for clarification for the public, we expanded it to say for purposes of the proposed moratorium, the term data center is defined in the Galton Zoning Ordinance adopted September 1st. A facility shall not be classified as a data center where the primary purpose of such facility is telecommunication services, including but not limited to wireline, wireless, broadband, or network interconnection services, or emergency communications infrastructure. Such facilities shall not be subject to the zoning, siting, or operational restrictions applicable to a data center.

I second that.

That's a motion by Councilman Juventus, seconded by Vice Mayor Hayes. Any discussion? All in favor of the amendment, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. Amendment passes unanimously. Back to the original motion. Now it's amended. Ready to vote? This is first reading on Ordinance 02609-67. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, say no. One no. Councilman Jones, correct. And five ayes. Item 11 is first reading on Ordinance 02609-68 by Mayor Hayes.

It's an ordinance to amend ethics code to create ethics commission. Motion to approve. Second.

Motion by Vice Mayor Hayes, second by Councilman Carter. Opening the floor for discussion. Have you all read this thoroughly? And Councilman Chabot, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mayor. I still think that regarding ethics, we should open it and choose between a pool of people, but that should be random.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you said.

Please translate.

He said he thinks that the commission should be chosen from a random pool of people.

Interested.

Interested people.

So we should open an application. People fill the application if they are interested, and all this application, take the people randomly out of it, and that's it. Will there be a member of council on this ethics amendment? No.

Members appointed by the mayor, affirmed by the council.

Susan, do you think that's something we can do legally or that would be an issue?

Not sure how you would do it. I guess you could. It's not my recommendation to do that. We have a board submission form on our website.

We could add it as a place that people could submit their interest.

I know in speaking with other cities, I'm not sure if it's in their bylaws, but they have certain types of people that they want on the board. That's my recommendation is to keep it the way that it is, but it's the will of this body. You make the policies. Yes, sir.

And I just want to remind everybody that this board, they would not be people that will be receiving a payment, and I think it would be ridiculous to add more working requirements for them to volunteer to do something that they're not compensated for. What requirement are you talking about? to ask somebody to do an application and to go through such a rigorous process to do something for free for the city of Gallatin. I think it's ridiculous.

I don't think submitting through the online process is entirely rigorous. I mean, it's typically a couple of questions of what you might be interested in, and you can upload your CV or resume.

An interest form? Okay, my mind is thinking different than just a simple interest form and an application. That's my opinion.

That's what it is. It's just an interest form on the website.

We need to set a date when it's going to start.

We have set a date, and let me think it happens immediately.

We'll have to have a process. Are we voting on having an ethics board made up to what we do?

Well, it's only for our ethics code, which is pretty specific of misusing your office.

So this will be... Any ethics complaint that is in the past has been brought to this body for a member of council. We've expanded it to a member of council or any department head or any board member of the city. If there's an ethics complaint right now, it comes to the city attorney. If it's a member of this body, I bring it to this body, and then you make the determination. This will take this body out of it, and we will have an ethics commission. And it takes the city attorney out of it as well.

Was that broken, the way we did it?

It puts the city attorney in a very awkward position, especially when one council member is bringing a complaint against another council member, and I have to bring that to this body. It makes it very awkward for the city attorney. And so for that reason, that's one of the reasons that I have recommended this process, and there are other cities that have this process. Okay. And it should be very rare. I mean, since I've been here 12 years and I think we've gotten three, so this is not something that's going to happen on a regular basis, I hope. It shouldn't. It should not.

And some never got brought here, too, you know.

How many people and what is the criteria to get on that board, likewise? I'm sorry, what was your question? How many people will be on the board? Five people. Five. Okay, what is the criteria?

We don't have a criteria at this point. Be a resident, not a member of any other board and that kind of thing. You have to be a resident or a property owner, and you have to have been a resident or a property owner for two years. The mayor, just like any other board or commission, the mayor makes a recommendation and this body approves it. This should be a board that meets probably the least of any board that we have in the city. They only meet when there's a complaint.

And the city attorney does advise to help with any questions they may have. So it's not just some...

I think we have time to figure out if that's something we can do to open it on the form and people decide or not. So I think we... It's first reading, so. Aye. Call for the question.

Call for the question. Second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. Question is called. This is first reading on the Ordinance 8609-68. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. That's passed unanimously, 6-0. Item 12 is Resolution R2-608-70, Vice Mayor Hayes.

Thank you. Resolution to authorize the City of Gallatin to apply for a grant through the Statewide Partnership Program for the Hoppet Drive Extension. Motion to approve?

Second. Motion by Vice Mayor Hayes, second by Councilman Carter. Any questions? Any discussion? It's Resolution R2-608-70. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Passes unanimously. Item 13 is Resolution R2609-74. Councilman Fann.

Thank you, Mayor. This is a resolution appointing Stan Carver to the Gallatin Industrial Development Board. And I so move.

Second. Motion by Councilman Phan, second by Councilman Carter. Are there questions or discussion? All in favor of Resolution R2-609-74, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. Passes unanimously. Item 14 is Resolution R2-609-75. Councilman Chabon.

Thank you, Mayor. It's a resolution accepting public improvement by the City of Gallatin, Tennessee in Carrollton, Phase A. Motion to approve. Aye.

Question by Councilman Givant, second by Councilman Carter. Any questions, any discussion? It's Resolution R2609-75. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. It does pass unanimously. Item 15 is Resolution R2609-76. Councilman Givant.

Thank you, Mayor. It's a resolution establishing the crossings at Eden Creek Infrastructure Development District. Motion to deny. Aye.

Question to deny, is there a second? Is there a second? Okay, so that dies for lack of a motion, lack of a second, I'm sorry.

Motion to send it off. Second.

Well, yeah, so now we have a motion to approve by Vice Mayor Hayes, a second by Councilman Carter that would open the floor for discussion. Okay, Councilman Alexander.

Thank you, Mayor. Motions to denies are just weird to me because you have to vote yes to vote no.

I know, I know.

I'd rather just talk about it and vote no. And I tell you, something in me is not at peace with these IDDs. The developers bring them. There's a benefit to them. isn't talked about a lot. They talk about the city and others that can benefit from it. But, man, I just really worry about these. Did a little bit of reading this week on while they have been successful in some places, they haven't in others. And I just feel like it's something that can trip up homeowners in the future. Not been a fan when we first discussed them. I voted no when they looked at putting them in at Station Camp, I voted no. I just, there's too much room for me, for a homeowner, especially a first-time homeowner who doesn't realize they're signing their name to hundreds of pages of documents at the bank, that it's just opportunity for them to get in trouble. I worry that they might be getting approved for a house they can't necessarily afford, and I know everybody says the banks are going to do this. I don't like the time frame that has been pushed upon the city. I know that's a state law, and I know who pushed that at the Capitol Hill. I'm sure building associations pushed that. We have a certain amount of time to give them an answer and just... I don't like that being forced upon the city. I just don't have a good feeling about IDDs in general, so I'll be voting no tonight.

Thank you, Mayor.

I made a motion to deny. I was going to explain why. I will be voting no, too, because I think... legal made it clear we need rules. I think right now there are no rules. So for some of you who bought a house, I don't know if you remember how many pieces of paper you signed. I think without rules, it's a wide waste. I mean, they can add on page 125 on small prints, and people are going to be subject to that infrastructure development, that extra tax. They're going to discover at the end of the year without knowing about it. So that's the main concern. The rules are great because I actually bring things to the city. I'm looking at that development. They already agreed to everything we asked them. And they agreed to it. They agreed to pay for the infrastructure improvement on Greenleaf. They agreed to connect on the back end. So when I read on the application, they said they're not going to be able to do that development if they don't get the IDD. I have a problem with that because it's not like they're arriving with a new product. They have been there for a year plus now with that development, adding pieces, changing things. And so in the question I asked the gentleman last week, when I asked him if you would be okay to remove his application until we get the rules. He had really an issue with it. He kind of ran around it, but he never told me no. So I think we should deny it, make our rules, get the rules so our city is protected and our citizens are protected. And when the rules are made, they can come back and put the same application there, and we go from there. But I think we should not rush. We're talking about $30 million. Who's going to go back to the future resident, including business? So we already say that we have issue bringing business in the city, and we're going to add an extra tax on square footage on every business. So apartments, same thing. I think things need to be done to make sure we protect everybody, including the people who are going to come there in the future. I think we need to deny it, work on what legal gave us with a great set of tools, and that's going to push it for a few months. They already started, so it's not like that's going to change anything. They're still going to build. Keep going the way they're doing it and bring it back to us when we have the rules and make sure we get something out of it because right now we won't. And that's not going to lower the price of the housing because people are going to pay it away or not. They're going to pay it at the end of the year or they're going to pay it up. So I would vote no.

Yeah, a couple things. You know, I look at it from it can be a win-win for the city, the developer, and the homeowner. Because the way I understand it is, I mean, I don't mean to contradict what you say, but the homeowner, they're buying that house for a lot less price. Yes, they're going in there and they should know that on the front end, what they're going to be paying over that amount of time. The developer, they're getting to sell the product. The city, we're getting projects done quicker than we can do it, a lot quicker. So therefore, I see it as a win-win-win. Is it perfect? Probably not. Has it not worked in some areas? Maybe it hasn't. But it's worked in more areas that I've seen that it hasn't. So, you know, I think this project would be a good one to go with. As far as our new set of rules and regulations, if you don't mind, can I get one of the persons from the development up here?

Make a motion to suspend the rule.

Motion to suspend the rule.

Second. Question second, all in favor? Aye. Opposed?

Thank you, Vice Mayor Craig. Mayor, members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to address you about this pre-petition process specifically. My name is Keith Randall. I'm with Winstead PC. I'm here to represent the petitioners.

And the question I have for you is that y'all have seen, I guess, I'm assuming y'all have, the new set of proposals, the proposal we have. I mean, y'all are okay with meeting all those. Y'all do not have a problem with any of those, right? I know one of them is the time frame. Absolutely. I know our new one changes it from, what, 45 days to 60 days?

It adds an additional 60 days on the process for a pre-petition, which allows the city to review a lot of information about the project to ensure it will go forward. And as Councilman Javon says, this project has been well vetted by this council over the last number of years. And I think there's a lot of confidence in city staff that the project will go forward. So it's not necessarily... ideal for, or necessary for this project to go through that kind of pre-petition review and extend it for additional 60 days.

Okay. I mean, that was the question I had, that y'all would be willing to. I mean, I don't have a doubt y'all would. Is our time up?

No, that was my time.

Go ahead. Yeah, I would say as well, we spent the last week reviewing the pre-petition process and reviewing the requirements. And I think absent the 60-day element and an additional element that I can address in a moment, we materially satisfy the requirements under the draft rules. And we're also willing to put that in writing along the process. If I can, I'm happy to run through each of the requirements in the pre-petition rules and represent to you all the way we're satisfying those rules, if you would permit me to do that briefly. The initial rule, the part of the process was this notice of intent that lays out the developer's ability to complete the process, understanding of who they're going to select to perform the process, whether or not the project fits with plan Gallatin and other city priorities. I would represent that all of that has either been done or is satisfied with the project and its current status. The only part of that that we're not satisfied is the additional 60 days. And our concern is if we wait and withdraw our petition and wait for that additional 60 days, we would have to wait for those rules to be adopted and then file a new petition and wait an additional 60 days. and then an additional 30 days after that at a minimum, which would put us well into the next year. And we think there might even be houses being sold at that point, which would remove our ability to receive benefit from the infrastructure district. The other process requirements are filing and mailing notice about the petition hearing, which we've satisfied here. That's a requirement of state law. Having a public hearing, which again, today we're having, again, a requirement of state law. The last piece of process added by your pre-petition rules is an additional notice post-creation filed with the clerk, the Register of Deeds. We're absolutely willing and able to do that post-creation of the district and meet any rules established now or in the future. The next section of your pre-petition rules refers to general policies about the IDD, the first many of which mirror the state law. The first is to limit our bond issuance to a period of 30 years. We're happy to do that. That's our plan as it is now. The second is to only use the bond proceeds to pay for eligible infrastructure costs under the statute. Again, that's a requirement of state law. We are planning on meeting that. The third is to meet an additional municipal benefit. The benefits are still in draft form, but largely they are related to providing infrastructure to support the project. We've been working on that infrastructure for quite some time now. We think our proposed infrastructure meets and exceeds the city's expectations as it relates to Big Station Camp, satisfying both the Transportation Improvement District, the needs of the project, and adds an additional benefit to the project. The next is a financing structure that requires the bonds to be issued. via public building authority in Tipton County. Our petition and consultation with the city's outside council already expected that change and we included a request that the bond issuance be issued via the public building authority or other relevant authority. The next requirement was a value to lien ratio of only 3 to 1. Our requested lien ratio is 2.97 to 1, which is materially the same. That still undergoes financial analysis through the public building authority. Through the process of bond issuance, they will be able to have an opinion if the project can support that lien to value ratio, and we're willing to listen to them through that process. The next is transparency and disclosure. I understand that this is a significant concern of the council. We agree. Clear disclosure is essential. Prospective purchasers and other effective parties should receive understandable information regarding the assessment, its duration, and the effect on the property. We agree now to affirmatively agree to meet all the disclosure requirements as stated in the draft petition. There is an optional community input as part of the rules. We don't necessarily believe that a community input is necessary considering these projects are all currently owned by the petitioners. The only property owners affected by the assessment are the current owners and the future owners. And as long as there is adequate disclosure, which we absolutely agree to do, we don't believe that a community input is absolutely necessary. The last general requirement is continued reporting to the council, yearly reporting from staff based on the progress of the infrastructure. Again, we're committed to assisting staff in that reporting and completing the project. The next element in your pre-petition rules is fees and expenses. You want to make sure that the city does not receive any expenses that aren't reimbursed by the developer. In our petition, you'll see on section 13 that we've already agreed to that. We are willing and able to pay for any of those expenses and indemnify the city. during the course of the project. Lastly, you don't have to rely solely on me standing up here and representing that we're going to meet these requirements. Before the bonds are issued, the petitioners need to enter into a development agreement with the public building authority and the city. And we, in that agreement, will identify the required infrastructure, the established completion and dedication obligations, address reimbursement and reporting procedures, And we're willing to include any post-establishment requirements from the draft process as binding commitments in that development agreement. So we can ensure with written contract that we'll meet these pre-petition guidelines in the future. So for those reasons, we respectfully ask the council to approve the creation of the district because the petition, we believe, materially satisfies the pre-petition process in its draft form. And we're looking forward to working with the city and being a proof of concept for that form going forward as we move towards bond issuance. And again, I thank you for your time to answer that question. And I'm willing to answer other questions. Sorry.

Thank you, Mayor. All is great, but all you stated is following the state law. My concern is you're selling it to us that by doing that, you're going to sell all the houses on the IDD cheaper because you're not going to have to pay for infrastructure. So that's $30 million on your paper you're going to bond and pass to the future resident. I didn't hear you say anything about that. You're talking about, I think the number on your study was $100,000 less per single-family residence. I see that nowhere in there. So, again, we're talking about the market-based. And if on the other side of the road they sell the same model for $400,000, the appraisal is not going to come back at 300 000 it's going to come back at 400 000 because it's a market base so that's where i have an issue with that because you cannot tell me uh or assure me that you're gonna sell these houses for hundred thousand dollars cheaper uh because it's a market base so that's where that's where i have a problem so we're gonna put a burden to the next the people were going to come there. And you were there on a work session where part of the stuff I wanted on our rules was that the fact that people were going to pay an extra tax was in the office, was in big, giant, later colors in every model house. And because, again, you that can be put on really small later somewhere. And I don't want my future constituents to come back and at the end of the year receive a bill from the city where we can be, you know, if they can pay, we can be in the same situation that 2008, where now the city is going to have to go and take a bunch of houses and become a real estate agency where that's not the job. So... And the rules we had were putting actually more things about, you know, affordable housing and all that stuff, where now you don't have that. So that just might... You don't have to respond. Luxor is going to go through anyway. But I appreciate your time, sir.

I'm happy to respond. I think there's multiple parts to your comments, if I may. On the municipal benefit, the affordable housing portion on Exhibit D has not been filled out by the city. I fully support affordable housing. The requirements on their pre-petition rules was to meet partially two of the three requirements or completely one of the three requirements. We would represent with our infrastructure improvements, we at minimum partially meet the two stated requirements that are filled out. As it relates to the disclosure requirements in the pre-petition process, we are absolutely agreeing to those rules as they end up being adopted by this council. We have no objection to being as loud and obnoxious with our disclosures as required in order, so no one is surprised by these assessments. We think that's a very important part of the process as we support it across the state. And finally, on the sale point, while that's not related to the pre-petition process, for Fundamentally, the homebuilder's desire is to sell the homes as quickly as possible so they are not paying the assessment. So there is no incentive for them to overprice the homes and just pocket the assessment. They're looking to receive a set amount of profit. And being able to build the lots at a lower rate allows them to sell their homes at a lower amount to speed up the sale of the homes to market. So that is important. ultimately an affordability tool. I understand you don't agree with that analysis. I'm happy to have further conversations with you about that as needed, but I recognize your disagreement there. I think that addresses all of your concerns.

Thank you. Anyone else with comments, questions? All ready to vote?

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

This is Resolution R2609-76. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, say no. No. Passes with a vote of 5-2 with Councilman Alexander and Ju... I'm sorry, thank you. 4-2. I'm used to saying 5. 4-2 with Councilman Juwanza and Councilman Alexander voting against. We'll move now to Item 16, which is Resolution R2609-78. Councilman Phan.

Thank you, Mayor. This is a resolution of awarding EAP benefits contract for the city of Gallatin. I so move. Second.

I have a motion. Councilman Fann, seconded by who was over here? Councilman Alexander. Oh, both of y'all. Okay. All right. Either one. Connie's got that.

All right.

Any discussion? If not, all those in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? Motion carries. All right, item number 17.

Make sure everyone's voting.

Did I say anybody opposed? Anybody opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Item 17, resolution number R2609-79. Resolution. Let's see. Councilman Carter.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. This is a resolution awarding life, accidental death and dismemberment, short-term disability and long-term disability benefits contract for the City of Gallatin and ISO move.

I have a motion by Councilman Carter. Second by Councilman Gibbons. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Anybody opposed? Motion carries. All right. Item number 18 is resolution number R2609-80. This is a resolution appointing interim director of human resources and setting compensation rate. Motion to approve. Second. Motion and second by Councilman Givantz. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? You had the wrong sign up. Oh, man.

Looked green to you, didn't it? Yeah.

Looked green on his side, didn't it? All right. Number 19. Resolution number R2609-81. Councilman Alexander.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. It's a resolution authorizing the mayor to sign a solid waste disposal and recycling agreement with the resource authority of Sumner County. I so move.

A motion and a second by Councilman Phan. Any discussion? Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Motion carries. All right, moving us on to other business. Does anybody up here have any other business? I do. Anybody? Councilman Carter?

Yes, sir. Thank you again. I just wanted to say happy 90th birthday to the folks at the Gallatin Church of Nazarene. The mayor and I attended their celebration on Sunday, and I was really shocked. I had never been there in my whole life, so I was really shocked to see that I knew so many people. But again, congratulations to them on 90 years, and we're hoping for 100 more years of love and prosperity there.

Anyone else have other business? Okay, seeing no one, we'll move on to public recognition on non-agenda related items. If you'd like to speak to an item that was not on the evening's agenda, I would welcome you to do so at this time.

That's really the only reason I come to the meetings. Renee Saunders, 2092 Rodman Boulevard. I just wanted to give a shout out to, oh, to apologize for not having been here. I've had some other things going on. A shout out to the sanitation department. Thank you for picking up large items so that I don't have to rent a truck or try to fit some stuff in the back of my car to take to the resource authority to pay a minimum of $8 to dump things off. Thank you to the sanitation department who will one day come by and pick up the sticks that I have taken care of from my backyard but have been sitting out in front of my yard for at least three weeks now. And there's at least one other neighbor who has the same thing. And... Oh, thank you to the fire department. I thought I had a gas leak. It was 11 p.m., and I felt so terrible, but I was lucky enough to have received a bill from the public utilities, and I still had the bill and the enclosure. with the bill that gives you instructions on what to do when you think you have a gas leak and it's after hours. And I live in Woodhaven and I don't know what the number of that stage number two, those gentlemen, and it was hot. still, and those gentlemen came, two fire trucks came, so quite a spectacle, but they didn't come with their sirens on, so thank you. But they had to put on all that heavy equipment and breathing apparatus to walk through my house, and they had three levels to walk through, and they did not grumble. They were kind, and they were professional, and I appreciated that. And finally, I wanted to give a shout out to also Gallatin Public Utilities. I think the lady's name was Melissa, but don't hold me to it. She came out after midnight. to make sure that the fire department's readings were correct. And she was a joy as well. She did not grumble. And I was very grateful for all of the help that I received that night. So a special shout out to all those folks. And I'm happy to be back. And thank you all for what you do.

Bishop Michael Clark, 1110—oh, no, excuse me, 110 West Gray Street. I just moved a few months ago. I want to piggyback off some things, not exactly what Ms. Saunders said. I have been very supportive of this council and the mayor and heard some things while I was watching the meetings on YouTube where there were some complaints. which I guess that's a daily thing. And I have never went to any of you all, councilmen and women, that I felt like I was shaded or not get the information that I needed, or the department heads or any of the workers in the office never felt like anybody was hiding any information from me or doing anything underhanded. I applaud you. If I'm not mistaken, unanimously, you all had voted for everything that was going on and has been going on at Clearview Park and the center there. I've been to, I believe, all of the meetings. Never felt that anybody was hiding any information or doing anything illegal. Anytime I went to Councilman Carter, Mr. Brown, Rosemary Brates, they gave me the information that I asked for, and I think it would behoove any of us that if you're going to lease a building to find out what you're leasing before you're occupied, and don't blame the ones that are managing the buildings. And I did a road survey from the Clearview area over to the Civic Center about two or three years ago, and it was just a little bit over a mile difference, that if they don't have anything at the Clearview Center, the amendments that you want, just drive an extra mile. over to the Civic Center and have some other rooms and everything that you want over there. I commend you all because I believe the budget was extended from where we, for the proposal that first came. And as we know, between the economy and tariffs and all kinds of other stuff, and I've never been a part of any building project, small or large, that it just went without any problems. So, once again, I just thank you all. And as you've been talking about these things concerning ethics, and I believe that we all should be ethical in everything, that I remember a couple of years ago, when I put in my petition at the voter's registration office, there was one councilman that was standing up under the clock that tried to oppose me from putting in my petition to run for city council. In my opinion, that's unethical. Someone that is originally from New York but has been here in the South for 46 years, my late grandmother said that's the pot calling the kettle black. Please, before you start accusing other people without any proof of anything. Every time you have one finger pointed at somebody else, you have three pointed at yourself. And I commend you all for having tough skin most of the time and taking all of this criticism that is coming against you. But I am reminded as I sit here and look at all of you, you was voted in by the majority. God bless you. Continue to do the work that God has called you to do.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing no one, public recognition on non-agent related items is closed. Motion by Vice Mayor Hayes, second by Councilman Alexander. All in favor say aye. Aye. Ladies and gentlemen, I wish you a lovely evening. I appreciate the words from early in the meeting to be kind, and I encourage you to be kind every day and show some love to your neighbors.